The migratory fl ows in Spain:
an analysis of the migration and
immigration input from
European Union
Introduction
T
AbstractExternal migration has always been present in Spanish history. Few years ago Spanish people has migrated to Latin-Americans and Europe countries. Now, as Spain has ceased to be a sender of immigrants and has become a receiver of such, it may seem that emigration no longer exists at all. Reality tells us differently. Also Spain, especially since 1986 (when it joined the European Union) has meant a large-scale transformation went from being a country of emigrants to a country of immigrants. In this article we show this process and the social consequences of this one.
Key words: Spain, emigrants, immigrants,
labour.
Jesús A. VALERO-MATAS, Juan R. COCA
& Sergio MIRANDA-CASTAÑEDA
Universidad de Valladolid/Universidad de Santiago de Compostela
he migration process is an essential part of human society. Since the beginning of humanity people have moved from one place to another. Yet external migration associated with the search for employment reached its highest point beginning in the 19th century approximately 42 Millions of persons (Carr-Saunders, 1936) and since then the levels have not stopped growing. These migrations have not always behaved in the same way, nor have they had the same ebbs and fl ows, producing cycles with varying intensities.
Resumen
Flujos migratorios en España: análisis de los fl ujos de migración e inmigraciones de la Unión Europea
La migración externa siempre ha estado presente en la historia de España. Hace pocos años los españoles migraban a América Latina y a países Europeos. Ahora, cuando España ha dejado de ser emisor de inmigrantes y se ha convertido en receptor, puede parecer que la emigración no existe en absoluto. La realidad demuestra lo contrario; también España, en especial a partir de 1986 (cuando se incorpora a la Unión Europea) ha signifi cado una transformación a gran escala, de ser un país de migrantes a un país de emigrantes. En este artículo mostramos este proceso y sus consecuencias sociales.
Palabras clave: España, emigrantes,
If we carry out a chronological analysis on global migration, we must speak of four distinct periods. These are the second half of the 19th century, early 20th century, after the Second World War, and the late 20th century to today. Possibly, as Castles and Miller (2003) pointed out, the 21st century may well be the century with the highest levels of external migration. The previously stated periods of migration each behaved in a characteristic way, either due to the size of the group or to the sending and receiving countries.
The second half of the 19th century was marked by the departure of Europeans to the New World. This can be considered as the beginning of customary migration, especially directed toward the United States due to the need to develop a growing economic society, and with great expectations. Something similar occurred with Latin American countries, where Spaniards perceived a source of development that did not exist in Spain at the time. The late 19th and early 20th centuries led to an immigration explosion that possibly, until this moment, was the period with the highest volume of immigrants more or less about 60 millions (Davis, 1936). This fl ow of immigrants was marked by people from the old continent, including both industrialized and industrializing nations: the U.K., Ireland, Italy, Germany, Spain, Austria, Czechoslovakia, Russia, etc. The industrial revolution in the United Kingdom and other continental European countries began to make a dent in the production sector. Less manual labour led to the displacement of workers, which in turn led to unemployment and generated a large amount of surplus labour. Faced with this adverse environment and without future expectations, workers looked to America, where population pressure did not exist and industrial growth did. Canada, the United States, Argentina and Brazil would be a means of escape for citizens of the old continent, seeming to them a solution for Europe’s problems. Undoubtedly, this led to a signifi cant population transfer from Europe to America, substantially raising the population growth rate in the receiving countries.
model. No longer were people solely migrating to the New World; rather, they also came to old Europe, which was closer.
Finally, in the late 20th century, so-called globalization has caused a major migratory movement at a planetary level. The “advanced” countries were receiving large numbers of people fl eeing poverty and seeking a better life. These migratory movements were composed not just of people with many transfers over long distances, but are also of signifi cant regional movements, from Honduras to Mexico, from Peru to Chile, and so on. We can look at the fl ood of immigrants who have arrived in Spain since the early 90s, which still continues. However, the economic crisis and more restrictive immigration policies of the UE have reduced the amount of people who try to settle in Spain (Ilies, 2009)
Spanish emigration
External migration has always been present in Spanish history, so much so that it can be said that the Spanish people are born learning to emigrate. Since the reconquest of Spain, Spanish citizens have been marked by their population mobility. During the period of the reconquest, an important contingent of people emerged from the Cantabrian mountain range (called the “Foramontanos Route”), distributed themselves throughout Spain, and repopulated the reconquered land. (internal migration) Later, in the Middle Ages, another reason to migrate emerged. The discovery of America made it necessary to explore and establish colonies in the American territory. Once again, the people of Spain begin to migrate. The external mobility of Spaniards did have negative consequences, one of which was depopulation of the interior of the continent for new land in the new continent.
wouldn’t be until the early 60s to mid-70s when the largest contingent of Spaniards left for other parts of Europe, just over two million. The main cause of this migration process was the Stabilization Plan of Franco’s government. The industrialization programs, the need to bring remittances from abroad, and fi eld technologization caused thousands of people to seek a future outside our borders. Spanish industry could not absorb the surplus labour —there was a type of repulsion— yet existed an attractiveness about Europe.
The departure of the working-age population had a positive effect. About 10 percent of Spanish working-age left the country. What implied that a signifi cant number of people will not press on the labour market, avoiding problems the state for its inability to absorb the workforce. And again, their wages sent a party to Spain, fattening and favouring the Spanish economy (Garmendia, 1981: 75).
Although in the 1960s migration to Latin American was reduced, many Spaniards still kept migrating to the former colonies. Work opportunities and language skills both helped. Mostly, they set out for Argentina and Venezuela. Between 1968 and 1975 Venezuela would be the fi nal destination for almost 50% of Spanish immigrants (Palazón, 1998: 42).
The skilled labour needed by some Latin American countries made it so that skilled professionals, technicians, artisans, and industrial workers set out for America. Those initial immigrants often had disparate goals. In some cases, they thought they would only be there for a short period of time, just enough time to earn enough money and return to Spain. Others, however, looked to set down roots and to begin a new life. Time- and labour-related circumstances would frustrate such aims for many of them. Moreover, many of the immigrants began the adventure with their families in tow, thus substantially reducing the possibility of a return migration.
The occupations of Spanish workers were very different. In Germany, they performed their tasks in the iron, chemical, and textile industry. In England, they were directed more toward catering and domestic service. In Holland, they mainly worked in the metal industry, but some worked in the textile sector. In Switzerland, the bulk of workers were concentrated in construction and, to a lesser degree, the hospitality industry. In France and Belgium, however, they were all distributed equally in low-skilled sectors: industry, hospitality, construction, domestic service, and a small percentage in agriculture. As noted by Meseguer (1975: 412).
Spanish emigrants, on the other hand, always show at least minimal professional capacity, occupy a lower status within the European professional scale; most are employed in industry, not as skilled labourers, but as unskilled labourers or in jobs requiring few skills/a rapid learning curve.
Unlike those who immigrated to Latin America, those who immigrated to other parts of Europe had many diffi culties trying to integrate themselves in the foreign cultures. Language ignorance was a barrier to full integration. Housing was another negative factor because low supply and high cost caused immigrants to look for cheaper places with poor conditions. Some companies and employers provided workers with accommodation, but it was generally in barrack-style housing meant for those who had come alone and not with their wives who also wished to work.
Discrimination at work was another unfavourable element for Spanish workers: they experienced wage gaps with native workers, lower wages, almost nonexistent relationships with local unions, and did not get the same benefi ts as the locals. Lack of formal preparation and diffi culties with the language prevented them from being able to develop their labour skills as they natives did. Thus, due to their inability to compete for the higher positions, they occupied low-skilled positions. This pseudoislation was a catalyst for the creation of centres for Spanish workers, which were run by Spanish workers, and thus served as served as places for meetings and mutual support. They established links between workers and companies, and launched union activities and training.
The majority of Spanish emigrants, when they left their country, wanted to return someday. In fact, a migrant’s need for a group of reference, while he or she is abroad, emphasizes his or her positive feelings toward his or her primary group and toward the local environment of his or her native
country, reinforcing the desire to return (Cazorla-Gregory, 1998). Most
Their plan was generally based on working and saving, thinking of returning. Savings investments were handled differently by those immigrants who went to Latin America and the rest. The former used their savings to purchase land or small businesses, i.e., they were looking to the future. Meanwhile, immigrants in Europe or North America invested in housing, the education of their children, and business. Said ways of investing could be due to the societal perceptions of the host countries. In Latin America, like in Spain, owning land was something of great value; in Europe and in North America, housing, education, and business were becoming the main areas in which citizens invested. The Spanish immigrant, like any other, mimicked the behaviours of the host society.
Consequences of Spanish emigration
After the Spanish Civil War, the Spanish population grew very little. However, in the 60s, there was a dramatic rise in population —known as the Baby Boom— the population grew from 30 to 34 million people (Garmendia, 1981). The Stabilization Plan helped the migration process by reducing the wages of workers and increasing unemployment. Farm technologization displaced many farm workers to the city, looking for work, while others went abroad. One of the Plan’s measures was to favour assisted emigration with the goal of receiving remittances from the emigrant, modernizing Spanish industry, and achieving full employment. This last goal was not achieved. However, emigration served to remedy the effects of unemployment and to calm the social situation in Spain.
There was no territorial immigration homogeneity. The largest contingents came from Galicia, the Canary Islands, Catalonia, Madrid, Asturias, and Castilla-Leon. With regards to the State’s interest in receiving foreign moneys and the post-war modernization of Spain, the State was not subject to a policy of equal investments for every region and even less to a policy of equal investment in the provinces of origin of the emigrants. The provinces that most benefi tted were those with lower populations. Therefore, the State missed the opportunity to distribute wealth and create homogenous territorial development. Provincial savings banks encouraged this inequality because emigrants mainly deposited their savings in said banks and, instead of spending these funds in provincial development, the banks invested in other, more developed regions because they were able to obtain greater benefi ts in those regions.
with the highest labour demand, rather than more technologically advanced ones. Many of the workers weren’t accepted because they didn’t have the requested qualifi cations.
Spanish emigration today
As Spain has ceased to be a sender of immigrants and has become a receiver of such, it may seem that emigration no longer exists at all. Reality tells us differently. Spaniards continue to emigrate, but it is also true that their reasons are very different than they were in the past: travelling abroad to participate in the activities of Spanish businesses there, multinational contracts with foreign capital, research and international cooperation. Some are looking for job opportunities, while other look for a better-paying job or just a job in general. At present, there are about 1 471 691 Spaniards working outside of Spain’s borders (INE, 2009).
The settlement of the Spanish people abroad has been very heterogeneous, as seen in the graphic. Latin America has the highest concentration of Spanish immigrants. But even within Latin America, the distribution is very unequal. Argentina and Venezuela are the two countries where the majority chooses to live, with 300 376 and 158 122 Spaniards, respectively, while only 993 Spanish citizens live in El Salvador. The United States of America holds 66 979 Spanish citizens while living 9 612 Spaniards in Canada. Focusing on the European Union, we see a similar picture: France, the United Kingdom, and Germany are where the majority of Spaniards are concentrated, and in the rest of Europe, Switzerland has the number, with 87 670 (INE, 2009).
)
,*
8
5
(
5
(
7
8
5
1
(
'
6
3
$
1
,
$
5
'
6
The current context: immigration in Spain
Immigration has changed the social, cultural, and ethnic map in Spain. Economic development in Spain, especially since 1986, when it joined the European Union, has meant a large-scale transformation. It went from being a country of emigrants to a country of immigrants. The transition to becoming a democracy began the process of economic and social movement. By then, foreigners who settled in Spain did not resemble the usual immigrants at that time, who immigrated for economic reasons, so they were called tourists. Social and climactic conditions contributed to their reasons for settling in Spain. These fi rst few waves of foreigners share similar characteristics, being mainly retirees with high incomes. In fact, some parts of Mallorca, the Canary Islands, and Andalusia are mainly composed of foreigners who fi t said profi le.
Because for so many years immigration was not part of the Spanish social conscious, a myth has been formed that reduces immigrants to merely employment-related concerns—someone who is an immigrant must therefore be taking work from locals. Without a doubt, this stereotype, which extends from the 90s, has been a key part in the rejection of immigrants and immigration.
),*85(
7+(,00,*5$173238/$7,21,163$,1
agriculture, construction labourers and retail, which are all jobs mostly shunned by native workers.
This shows no relation between immigration and local unemployment, as it was intended to do. Distrust creates a degree of uncertainty within the immigrant population and rejection among the natives.
Following this line of analysis, it should be indicated that as a result of the aging Spanish population and the structural changes in Spanish society, immigration is solving two problems: a) some of the economic and labour problems, fi lling jobs rejected by natives and contributing to the pension
plans1, b) to a lesser extent, they have helped to repopulate some areas
where depopulation was occurring as well as increase birth rates, as Spain has one of the lowest birth rates in Europe.
In the study of Spanish immigration, we must discuss two issues, a) different immigrant arrival periods, whether for political reasons or Spanish economic growth, and b) the size of the immigrant contingents, which does not show a homogeneity in the migration process. With regards to
the fi rst issue, there were various periods. The fi rst, which we can call the
beginning (1975-1985), includes the fi rst arrivals of immigrants, but Spain did not act as a receiving country during that period. In 1975, only 165 289 foreigners lived in Spain, and by 1985 that number had only increased to 241 975. Most of them were based either in Madrid or Barcelona. The
second, orgrowth (1985-1995), phase was when Spain began to be seen as
an immigrant-receiving country, since the number of arriving immigrants had doubled. Thus, the immigrant population went from 241 975 to 499 773. The third, or acceleration (1995-2007), period saw a huge increase in the number of foreigners, outstripping all prior expectations. From the 499 773 immigrants of the previous decade, the number rose to 3 979 014, which represented 8.5 per cent of the total population (Statistical Yearbook of immigration, 2008). At this time immigrants began to move to other geographical areas, due to the high concentration in large cities and the production needs of other Spanish regions. The autonomous regions, such as Murcia, Valencia, the Canary Islands, Andalusia, and, to a lesser extent, Navarra, Galicia, or Castilla-Leon were all subject to a signifi cant cultural transformation. The fourth, or maturity, period (2006-2009) saw the continued arrival of foreigners, but in much smaller numbers, due partly to the world fi nancial crisis and the restrictive political policies of the European Union. Immigrants even began to talk about a return to their home countries, but such talk did not seem to be carried out. Instead, they began a process of internal mobility, looking for areas with a low immigrant presence.
We now must address the second criterion, the size of the contingents. According to Reques-Cos (2003), we speak of the European period because until 1990 most of the foreigners living in Spain were citizens of the EEC, now called the EU. From that year on, the Latin American explosion began, which to this day has been the largest contingent of foreign residents in Spain. Note that the arrival of Latin Americans followed a saw tooth evolution pattern. Initially, the fi rst among them to move to Spain in the 70s did so for political reasons, and thus came from countries under dictatorships, like Cuba, Chile, Uruguay and Argentina. Until the mid-90s, Argentineans made up the most numerous group with 20 000 immigrants. In the mid-90s, a change occurred. Dominicans and Peruvians displaced the rest of Latin Americans, becoming, in the year 2000, the most numerous groups, mainly because women from these countries were arriving to work in domestic service.
274 832 people, respectively. In the nineties, a period of immigration explosion in Spain, Africans entered the scene with a bang, and in 2008 they became the second largest group of immigrants after the Latin Americans. Moroccans represent three-quarters of Africans living in Spain (717 416 persons in 2008 of a total 922 635 African immigrants), followed distantly by Algerians and the Senegalese with 48 919 and 34 013 (Statistical Yearbook of immigration, 2009). Until the 90s, the presence of foreign Africans was basically insignifi cant. Once the 90s began, Africans’ entrance into Spain was unceasing. The causes are multiple. In our view, three elements come together: 1) the diffi culty of fi nding employment in France, a preferred destination for Moroccans, Algerians, and Tunisians, 2) the Spanish economic boom, and 3) the solidifi cation of social support networks for immigrants. The labour niches occupied by these people were mainly in the agricultural and construction sectors.
In 2003, an important migratory movement began, originating in Eastern Europe. The countries of origins were varied. Romania sent the most. Domestic problems, low levels of industrialization, and the lack of prospects were all issues that caused many to leave, seeking work and better living conditions. Between 2003 and 2006, the transfer of humans from Romania to Spain was unceasing, doubling in just one year.
With the EU’s expansion (2007), involving the integration of Romania and Bulgaria, the number of immigrants arriving per year went from 211 325 in 2006 to 603 889 in 2008. Something similar happened with Bulgarian citizens as well, but not to the same degree as with Romanians (Statistical Yearbook of immigration, 2009).
Asians make up the fourth continental group. Ever since the Spanish economic boom, they have been present in our human geography. In the 80s, Philippine natives established the diaspora, with women who came to work in domestic service making up a large part. In the late 20th century, China amended its immigration policy and embarked upon a new policy by encouraging and even urging its citizens to leave the country and send money back home. Spain would be one of their destinations, and in 2005 it would become the largest Asian group. Pakistanis also became a major presence, and since 2002 have been the second largest Asian group, forcing the Filipinos to third place.
)
,*
8
5
(
)
2
5
(
,*
1
5
(
6
,'
(
1
7
3
2
3
8
/
$
7
,2
1
,
1
6
3
$
,1
Another issue that should be highlighted is the economic profi les of immigrants who have arrived in Spain during the last 20 years. In the 70s and 80s, most foreigners were characterized by their high education levels. That is, around 70 per cent were college educated or vocationally trained. By the 90s, the typical immigrant’s profi le was markedly different; there were usually people with a primary- or secondary-level education, and a low percentage of people with higher education. In addition, illiterate people started to arrive. This fact allows for two interpretations: on one hand, it justifi es the ethnic stratifi cation of the labour market because immigration allows immigrants to fi ll jobs tailored to their profi les. On the other hand, their professional limitations relegated them to precarious, low-skilled jobs.
While most immigrants are concentrated in fi ve autonomous regions, they are not those who have the greatest impact on the workforce. If we look at the above chart, we can see that it is the Balearic Islands where the immigrant population has the highest participation rate in work activity (22.9 per cent), followed by Murcia with 21.4 per cent (Statistical Yearbook of immigration, 2009). This indicates that, when studying immigration, one must look not only at the concentration of immigrants but also the relational indices of native- and foreign-born populations. Both the Balearic Islands and Murcia are single-province autonomous regions, but both have high concentrations of immigrants. Therefore, their impact on the labour market is greater, as well as their impact on social and integration problems and costs in education, health, and social services. If we add it up, the economic crisis amplifi es unemployment spending in both immigrant and native populations, and at the same time it produces such inequalities and could even cause rejection of immigrants.
)
,*
8
5
(
3
(
5
&
(
1
7
$
*
(
2
)
7
+
(
3
2
3
8
/
$
7
,2
1
%
<
$
8
7
2
1
2
0
2
8
6
5
(
*
,2
1
Lastly, we cannot forget about the almost one million so-called “illegal” immigrants who live in Spain (Compiled from data from the Department for Work and immigration and National Statistic Institute). So far we have looked at data about people with residence permits, but we cannot ignore those who live in Spain without permission. If the circumstances of the administratively regulated immigrants are complicated, it is much more so for those who do not have legal permission to live in Spain. Without work permission, the immigrant cannot work and hence is often exploited by businesses and involved in criminal activities. This irregularity favours exploitation at the hands of employers who take advantage of the situation by paying lower salaries for the same work, distorting and breaking down the labour market, and increasing illicit work. It also contributes to the recruitment of such persons by organized criminal groups.
The current economic crisis has had a higher impact in the immigrant community—in some regions of Spain, the unemployment rates of immigrants have exceeded 50% (Statistical Yearbook of immigration, 2009)
Education is another important cultural aspect. The arrival of people with cultural differences has led to a substantial change in our schools. This is an enriching experience with regards to our children because they are being educated amongst great cultural diversity. Yet the education of children and adults opens major questions about the future of education, questions that may lead to various national and regional changes, and will continue to be some of the great unknowns of our educational system.
So far, for many reasons, whether due to not knowing the language, lack of life plans, relative economic deprivation, strong cultural differences, and in my cases lower cultural levels, immigrants perform more poorly than natives in academic settings. It is true that the amount of time spent in Spain and the age upon entry are both key factors for academic performance and social integration. Immigrant children who have been in Spain for over fi ve years and who came to Spain when they were ten years old or less have a very favourable socialization outlook. Thus, they also have a favourable outlook with regards to their integration in the Spanish socio-educational model. In other words, their performances are similar to native children.
When the school has a high level of immigrant students, many natives move their children to schools where there are no immigrants or their number is relatively low, and thus certain schools begin to exist solely for immigrants or excluded groups. Such behaviour is hardly conducive to integration and coexistence —there is no cultural contact.
Housing is another important factor in inclusion as well as the achievement of the immigrants’ life plans. Their dwelling becomes a means to integration, as it is a way of accessing various social benefi ts, improving their standing, and reducing their vulnerability (Valero 2007). When immigrants try to live in outlying areas, suburbs, or city centres, they are often stigmatized and seen as contributing to the decline of the neighbourhood. Actually, what happens is that immigrants live in these areas because they have insuffi cient means to live anywhere else with better conditions. We’re talking about urban areas where houses have major structural defi ciencies that violate the minimum health regulations. In other situations, high housing costs lead them to live in overcrowded apartments because, with their meagre wages, they cannot afford to own a home or rent a property. It also happens that many landlords refuse to rent to immigrants. Both of these causes are leading to abuse and exploitation of immigrants’ diffi culties with regards to fi nding housing, which in turn increases the phenomenon of so-called hot beds. In many cases, this abuse is carried out by the immigrants themselves, the ones who have managed to rent apartments. They profi t from others’ unstable situations.
A global vision: refl exions about immigration
The arrival of workers from countries with low- or medium-incomes has not only led to the creation of new employment niches, but also to the displacement of native workers. On the other hand, thanks to immigrant workers, native workers have been promoted because of the foreign labourers fi lling the jobs of lower statuses.
a job causes the native workers to perform the same tasks for lower pay. Two, companies recruit unskilled employees who are paid less, essentially taking advantage of immigration.
As suggested by Iglesias and Llorente (2008: 90), to date, immigration processes have had a positive effect on our economy in terms of the general welfare. Nonetheless, immigration is causing regional labour disputes. Immigrants tend to settle in areas with active labour markets; at the same time, they put pressure on the market and contribute to the revitalization. Thus, they contribute to improve levels of labour activity. The less dynamic regions are not affected by immigration pressures and they do not blame immigration when they are unable to fi nd work. As a consequence, there are signifi cant inequalities between the autonomous regions. This had been occurring up until 2008, but as a result of the economic crisis, other problems have emerged, such as increased unemployment in the immigrant population, forcing them to seek employment in an autonomous region with lower immigrant presences.
Though, unlike the economic contributions of the Spanish immigrants of the past, with regard to the Latin-American immigrants in Spain, a substantial difference appears, possibly for the contextual difference. In the past an exposition of life based on the attainment of aims planed on the creation of future business plans. In the present, as happens in Latin America lies in the consumer. Here it takes root in one of the differential aspects between the remittances of the Spanish immigrants of the past with the Latin-American immigrants.
The global economic crisis is reducing migration fl ows, but is especially frustrating the expectations of many immigrants to American and European dreams. In the Spanish case, although immigrants continue to arrive, the percentages are much lower than years past. But also, many are returning to their countries of origin by the lack of work. And others do not return for fear of failure. This fact leads to a deterioration of immigration in the host country. Maybe this is one of the evils of the XXI century immigration
BORJAS, G, 1993, Friends of strangers, the impact of immigrants on the US eco-nomy, Basic Books, Washington.
CARR-SAUNDERS, A, M, 1936, World population, Oxford university Press, Oxford.
CASTLES S and M. MILLER, 2003, the Age of Migration, The Guilford Press, New York.
CACHÓN, L, 1997, ‘Segregación sectorial de los inmigrantes en el Mercado de trabajo en España’, en Cuadernos de Relaciones Laborales, núm. 10.
CAZORLA, J, and D. GREGORY, 1998, ‘la emigración española a países Euro-peos: problemática y soluciones’, en Revista andaluza de inmigración, núm. 25. DAVIS, M, R, 1936, World migration, MacMillan, New York.
GARMENDIA, J, A, 1981, la emigración española en la encrucijada, CIS, Ma-drid
IGLESIAS, C. y R. LLORENTE, 2008, “Efectos de la inmigración en el mercado de trabajo español”, en Papeles de Economía, núm. 367.
ILIES, M, 2009, “la política de la Comunidad Europea sobre inmigración irregular: medidas para combatir la inmigración irregular en todas sus fases”, en Documentos de Trabajo ( Real Instituto Elcano de Estudios Internacionales y Estratégicos), num. 38.
MESEGUER, J, 1975, “La emigración española en los países de la CEE”, en Re-vista de Instituciones Europeas, núm. 2.
MINISTERIO DE TRABAJO E INMIGRACIÓN, 2009, Anuario de inmigración, Publicaciones del Ministerio de Trabajo, Madrid.
PALAZÓN, Ferrando, S, 1998, Reanudación, apogeo y crisis de la emigración exterior española (1946-1995), Eria.
REQUES, P. y O de COS, 2003, “La emigración olvidada: la diáspora española en la actualidad”, en Papeles de Geografía, núm. 37.
SOLÉ, C. y S. PARELLA, 2001, “La inserción de los inmigrantes en el mercado de trabajo, el caso español”, en C. SOLÉ, El impacto de la inmigración en la eco-nomía y en la sociedad receptora, Anthropos, Barcelona.
VALERO MATAS, J. A., 2007, La educación social ante los nuevos retos de la inmigración y los servicios sociales, Universidad de Valladolid, Valladolid. VIRUELA MARTÍNEZ, R, 2002, “La nueva corriente inmigratoria de Europa del Este”, en Cuadernos de Geografía, núm. 72.
Jesús Alberto VALERO MATAS
Doctor in Sociology (UCM). Graduate in sociology (UCM) and BA in Political Science and Management (UCM). He is currently professor of sociology at the University of Valladolid. He has been visiting professor at various universities abroad, Edinburgh University, Auckland University, Colorado School of Mines, UNAM, Polish Academic Nauk, Georgetown University, etc. She has won more than 20 publications in national and international journals and several books.
E-mail: [email protected]
Juan R. COCA
Biology graduate, Master in Logic and Philosophy of Science, and currently a doctoral candidate in sociology at the University of Santiago de Compostela. He is a researcher in the department of sociology on sociological imagination at the same university. He has published over 40 papers and a dozen books chapters. He has been visiting researcher at the University of Valladolid.
Sergio MIRANDA CASTAÑEDA
Holds a diploma in Social Work for the University of Valladolid (2002) and BA in Sociology for the University of Salamanca (2006). Currently working as a graduate research at the Offi ce of Research and Evaluation at the University of Valladolid and associate professor in the Department of Sociology and Social Work at the same university.
Este artículo fue:
